In an effort to reduce ambient levels of air pollution in the United States, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed a tightening of the emissions standards for heavy-duty diesel engines. This proposal includes measures for reducing the allowable sulfur content of diesel fuel. The proposal aims to lower emissions by about 95 percent, with nitrogen oxides (NOx) and particulate matter (PM) emission standards of 0.2 and 0.01 gram per brake horsepower hour, respectively.
Existing aftertreatment technologies for achieving these goals include both PM reduction systems and NOx reduction systems. For PM reduction, existing technologies include a continuously regenerating trap (CRT®) and catalyzed traps. The term “CRT®” refers specifically to the particulate filter manufactured by Johnson Matthey of London, United Kingdom, described in U.S. Pat. No. 4,902,487. For NOx reduction, existing technologies include selective catalytic reduction (SCR) systems that use urea as the reductant, and NOx storage catalysts.
Various factors determine which aftertreatment technology is most suitable for diesel engine exhaust. One consideration is the effect of the sulfur content in the diesel fuel. Sulfur increases the regenerating temperature of a CRT, which adversely affects its performance. Sulfur is also a poison for NOx traps. Because of the negative effects of sulfur on aftertreatment performance, the EPA is recommending a diesel fuel sulfur cap of 15 ppm.
However, evidence implies that 15 ppm may still be too high for NOx traps to be effective. As a result, urea SCR systems may be a more effective method for adequate NOx reduction.
Despite their effectiveness, urea SCR systems are not without their shortcomings. Urea SCR is based on ammonia reduction, with urea being the reductant of choice for vehicular applications, due to the perception that a supply of ammonia on-board a vehicle would be unsafe. Ammonia is considered to be highly toxic, whereas urea is only mildly toxic. But the problem with urea SCR is that a separate supply of urea is required on-board. Not only does this requirement call for a separate storage tank, but the urea must be replenished periodically and there is no infrastructure to provide a nationwide supply. Also, the system required to introduce urea into the exhaust stream is complex. In sum, there are many issues affecting the practicality of using urea for SCR.